21

Where has Luke Skywalker been?

This question is asking "Do we have any evidence of where he's been?"

Which is a cut and dried objective Yes/No no question, but it was closed as "primarily opinion based".

Either the answer is "Yes (and here's where)" or "No (and hopefully an explanation)".

If it were closed due to our future works policy, that seems to be a misinterpretation. This question isn't (and never was, if you look at the edit history) asking about the content of a work that's not yet released. It's present tense asking if, up to this point in time, has any info been released.

Our future works policy was intended to stop questions being asked specifically about works that haven't been officially released yet. An example would be "What is Luke Skywalker's role in Episode VIII?"

Furthermore, it was closed after it was answered, and the answer clearly shows that there is (and always was) an objective answer.

7
  • 8
    Generally things are closed as "future works" where they're impossible to answer now and trivially simple to answer afterwards
    – Valorum
    Mar 31, 2017 at 11:01
  • @Valorum Generally. But this wasn't the case. It was a new question,not impossible to answer, and as worded doesn't require any future works to answer.
    – user31178
    Apr 1, 2017 at 4:02
  • 1
    @CreationEdge: It might have been better received if it had given a fixed end date instead of (presumably) asking about the entire rest of Luke's life (i.e. something like "Where was Luke between destroying the Death Star and [canon event]?"). It's still a perfectly valid question without that, but it's a little less obviously valid than it otherwise might have been.
    – Kevin
    Apr 2, 2017 at 2:15
  • 1
    @Kevin I feel like there's always an implied "as of this time", as in latest canon currently available. That's pretty much how the site runs, unless people specify an earlier time. But the POB reason still leaves me confused, because wouldn't an unclear time period be too broad or unclear instead of POB?
    – user31178
    Apr 2, 2017 at 2:21
  • 1
    @CreationEdge: As I said, I think the question is valid either way. But you see people close voting for the wrong reason (or close voting a question that doesn't need to be closed) all the time.
    – Kevin
    Apr 2, 2017 at 2:25
  • @CreationEdge - if I were you, I would either try to get it reopened once the movie is out, or just re-post as a new question. The movie itself may answer the question, although I doubt it. In which case, we'll just have to wait for the new Disney canon to catch up. I had the same thing happen to a question about Aquaman in the DCU movies, but I do understand the mod point of view as well.
    – Omegacron
    Apr 4, 2017 at 2:19
  • @Omegacron Well, it's already reopened, I'm just trying to figure out why it was closed. It never once mentioned Episode 8. Nowhere does it even hint it's asking about the next movie. That's why I find this so confusing.
    – user31178
    Apr 4, 2017 at 3:44

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

The question was closed as primarily opinion based. It is difficult to tell why, and none of the close-voters have commented, either on the question itself, or this meta discussion.

It is my opinion that it is not opinion-based, given the clear request for canonical evidence in the actual question. I would speculate that the original voters simply made a mistake.

Regardless, the post has been reopened. I do not think there is more to be discussed, unless further trouble arises.

10
  • This, for me, is the future trouble. I've seen objective questions closed as POB or at least VTC'd a couple times recently. So this appears to be the escalation. I don't know if it's a one of, or part of a trend, is my concern.
    – user31178
    Apr 8, 2017 at 2:50
  • 2
    @CreationEdge - The problem here is that this is a future works question, covered with the fig-leaf of asking about current works.
    – Valorum
    Apr 8, 2017 at 6:14
  • @Valorum How do you even possibly figure that? 1) It's not even limited in scope to movies. 2) There's still other canon works being released that most people don't keep track of (such as all those comics, like the one that explained C-3P0's red arm) 3) It's asking about as of now, it never once mentioned a future work. 4) A huge number of questions on our site are all about asking if some information or "evidence" exists somewhere else in the canon, that's how our site operates. I can't fathom how you think this is "thinly veiled" future works compared to 90% of the Harry Potter stuff.
    – user31178
    Apr 8, 2017 at 7:17
  • I agree with CreationEdge, there, @Valorum. The fact that Luke Skywalker's "future" is in the "future" of the series is not enough, by itself. I feel like any other question could fall under the same "fig leaf", because future work could very well add or remove information from possible answers. Is there any evidence of Luke Skywalker's actions after the destruction of the second Death Star does not seem like a request for speculation in the slightest, especially considering the fact that some of these actions have already been stated in the most recent episode movie.
    – Gnemlock
    Apr 8, 2017 at 7:23
  • @CreationEdge - Luke's actions between the movies is highly likely to be covered in the sequel. For me "Future works" is most appropriate when a question asks something that's essentially impossible to answer now, but trivially simple to answer in a years time.
    – Valorum
    Apr 8, 2017 at 7:25
  • For the record, I think this one skates under the bar, but only by a whisker and only because you've made it specifically about new-canon already released.
    – Valorum
    Apr 8, 2017 at 7:26
  • @Valorum, that logic, in itself, is based off pure speculation that it will be covered in more detail in future years. For all we know, Luke Skywalker dies in the first five minutes, and is unheard of for the rest of the series. Probably not, but unless we are actually working on the new movies, we can not tell, for sure.
    – Gnemlock
    Apr 8, 2017 at 7:29
  • @Valorum I never made it about existing canon, it was always that way. The user mentioned reading some books, and was asking if the information was somewhere else since the books they read didn't have it. I don't get the "by a whisker". The policy was meant to discourage explicitly asking about not released works. Asking about whether a work exists or not has never been disallowed (and that's pretty much how Story Identification questions exist).
    – user31178
    Apr 8, 2017 at 7:43
  • 2
    Hmm. I think I'll write up a proper answer that you can downvote
    – Valorum
    Apr 8, 2017 at 7:44
  • The edit history clearly shows that it always asked for evidence. I checked that out before posting my answer.
    – Gnemlock
    Apr 8, 2017 at 7:44

You must log in to answer this question.